well, as I have pointed out, there is a cadre of left leaning propaganda sites like RIGHT WING WATCH, mediamatters, PoliticusUSA, ThinkProgress, etc, posing as news websites.
Slate calls them "the liberal attack machine." Hillary Clinton bragged about starting and supporting some of them, and they return the favor in spades.
Media matters has recently abandoned any pretense of independence and has openly defended Hillary Clinton in connection with the email scandal.
Are there right wing attack sites? Of course. My perception is however that people much more frequently cite to the left leaning sites as if they legitimate news sources. I point out, not infrequently, that these sites are filled with over heated rhetoric, poisoning the well, etc. People respond that the sites "cite their sources!" Well it seems to me that a person should cite the source, rather than give it a spin through the liberal attack machine.
I endeavor as much as possible to cite main stream media sources whenever possible. In fact i have repeatedly held off on updating avid readers in the Benghazi thread because stories were only available on on such sites. In fact, I try to avoid such sites unless it is impossible (example: judicial watch which I cite to because they are the only site that has actual government records discovered through their FOIA requests)
I find it hard to take a thread seriously that starts off with outrage from a propaganda site like RIGHT WING WATCH, which seems to have no place on a skeptics site.
Thus endeth the Sermon.
